jiayao_zhao Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 First off, Happy Cristmas to all.I am thinking of purchasing a tele lens in purpose of taking lotus pictures in summer and occationally birds' pictures etc.I know above mentioned two primes are praised by all users.If I add 1.4X lens on EF300F4,will it be equil to EF400F5.6 in terms of image quality and AF spead on my 10D? Will the advantage of two focal lenth compensates the image and AF disadvange? If I add Ef400F5.6 with 1.4X lens,Will my 10D's AF still work? Thanks for advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lu_yin Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 300f4 with 1.4x will be fairly close to 400/5.6 in sharpness, but not as good. 1.4x with 400/5.6 will disable AF on 10D for a good reason: it's too dim to focus accurately.It's probably a goodf idea to have 300/4 as IS will be available, and it weight about the same as 400/5.6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 I considered the 400 f/5.6 L for about a microsecond. Then I remembered that the 300 f/4L has IS, and all thoughts of the 400 flew right out the window. There are detractors of IS, but unless you are permanently rooted to a 12 pound tripod, there's no real choice aside from the 300 in my opinion. Chances are, anyone who recommends against the 300 either... 1. Owns a 400 f/5.6 or the 300 f/4L NON-IS and doesn't want to admit that anything's better... 2. Hasn't ever NOT used a tripod 3. Definately hasn't ever used the 300 f/4L IS IS is absolutely amazing, and there's really no other choice once you use an IS lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yadayadanoonecares Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 The post above from andrew pretty much says it all. And although the 400 5.6 might be a notch sharper when viewing a resulting slide, I know for a fact it wont show on the results when using a 10d (i've tried them all before buying: 300f4l, 300f4lIS, both with and without 1.4x, 400mm 5.6). The added flexibility of the choice of 300mm or 420mm is a + with the 300, the IS is very valuable, EVEN when using a tripod (I use a tripod often, and can let the ballhead lose, framing freely, tripod takes away the 'swings', while the IS compensates for the movement introduces by my hands, believe me, its a great tool!). Additionally, the 300mm4L IS version focusses down to 150cm, and with a 1.4x or even 2x converter it makes a great semi-macro lens giving a very good working distance. I did own a 400mm in the past (sigma 400mm 5.6 APO), and found there where many instances where 400mm was just a tad to long, and 5.6 was just a tad to slow. Also remember that with the 1.6x, a 400mm lens becomes 640mm!, without IS, indeed it needs to be permanently attached to a 10kg+ tripod. Using the 300mm4lIS + 1.4x, i've managed to get handheld shots at 1/60! When it becomes to dark, or subject to close, I remove the 1.4x, and can continue in 50% of the light (even less as the decreased nr. of mm allows for slower speeds). The 400 + 1.4x wont AF with the 10d (unless you tape a few contacts at the T.C.). With the 300 you have the choice of 1.4x with still excellent A.F., and can add a 2x later (taping the contacts), giving hitt-and-miss af (still usable under not-to-dark cercumstances). No matter what your choice though, be prepared to work on your long lens technique, the "actual" focal lengths are 1.6x the lenses, making the 300mm almost a 500m!, and with the 1.4x those 420mm almost become a whopping 700mm. It took me some time to get things right for various situations, here are my findings: 300mm F4l IS (with or without TC): Shutterspeed < 1/2 -> Tripod, "Fixed", IS off, selftimer Shutterspeed 1/4 to 1/15 -> Tripod, "Fixed", IS off, MLU , selftimer Shutterspeed 1/30 to 1/60 -> Tripod, "lose ballhead", IS on Shutterspeed >=1/60 -> Handheld, IS on Needles to say, with the 1.4x, the succesration of 'lose-ballhead' and 'handheld' when below 1/200 decrease a bit, but on the tripod, at 1/60 with IS on, 75% of my images are tack-sharp (after quite some practice though!), handheld, that falls to about 25%. For what it's worth, whenever I can, I will use a tripod. But from the car window, or when walking and unexpectedly seeing that bird, deer, or hot-chick ;) , the IS saves the day. Additionally, in low light (but staying at 1/60 or above), no longer do I miss shots because I have to "frame -> tighten ballhead -> hands of the camera, confirm framing, all-clear, use cable release", you can imagine that anything else then a landscape has moved between the framing and release part.... Anyhow, thats just my 2cts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiayao_zhao Posted December 12, 2003 Author Share Posted December 12, 2003 Thanks. I am considering towards IS lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_turner Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 Happy Christmas to you, Jaiyao! As a holiday gift, may I present the photo.net search engine! The question you ask has been discussed many times- here for example: http://www.photo.net/canon/300-4 Cheers, Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard harris Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 Just to throw a couple of other thoughts into the mix: the 400 F5.6L has the fastest autofocus, the 300 F4 is next but with a converter it is slower still. For fast moving subjects the 400 is the best lens. Having said that, on the 10D the 400 is an effective 640mm lens, so that may actually be a tad long for most applications. The 300 F4L IS is the most versatile choice, as has been pointed out already. The IS and close focusing make this lens pretty useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wimswyzen Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 Jiayao, I think both lenses are very good and it ultimately depends on your priority (ies) with regard to what you want to shoot. Wheras I don`t disagree on the IS technology, bear in mind that many good photographers still do use non IS versions. Just to give you a flavor, visit G.Hopkins site (http://www.naturesglory.net/biography.html). She shoots with the 400/5.6L Best luck in your choice, Wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jiayao_zhao Posted December 13, 2003 Author Share Posted December 13, 2003 Thanks again. Now I wish Canon can produce certain DSLR which has IS sensor in it. I believe it's more practical than IS it's glass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_larson1 Posted December 13, 2003 Share Posted December 13, 2003 IS in the body would be great if you shoot alot of 6lb long glass. A bit of a waste if shoot 4oz primes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted December 14, 2003 Share Posted December 14, 2003 <P> I suggest you also look <a href="http://www.birdsasart.com/faq.html">here</a> and <a href="http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml">here</a>. </P> <P> Happy shooting , <br>Yakim. </P> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now